Prince Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24157 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2025 Thana- RAMPUR HARI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Prince Kumar S/o- Ram Udar Ray R/v- Lalpur P.S.- Garha Bochaha DistMuzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Nafisuzzoha, Advocate Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey, Advocate Mr.Shabina Talat, Advocate Mr.Rishan Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Abhay Kumar Roy, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 15-07-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The accused/petitioner seeks bail in connection with Rampur Hari P.S. Case No. 114 of 2025 registered for the offences under Sections 77, 108 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (in short, the 'B.N.S.') and section 66(E) & 67 of the I.T. Act.
3. The accused/petitioner is named in the First Information Report and is in custody since 20.01.2026.
4. The base of FIR is a private complaint being Complaint Case No. 5522/2024 dated 10.12.2024 lodged before the court of learned C.J.M., Muzaffarpur.
5. Allegation, as per FIR/complaint, is that petitioner
2/4 uploaded his objectionable photos with the daughter of the informant on social media and due to this act of petitioner, the daughter of the informant found dead on 26.10.2024 at about 10:00 A.M.
6. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that when the love affairs of daughter of the informant with this petitioner was came into the knowledge of the informant, she was killed by the informant and his family members and to save themselves from honour killing, the present false FIR/Complaint was lodged. It is submitted that same can be gathered safely from the fact that no cause of death was assigned.
7. It is pointed out that even the complaint is not disclosing whether the victim committed suicide. It is further pointed out that no post-mortem was conducted and death of the daughter of the informant was not reported to the concerned police station, which in itself is sufficient to gather malafideness of the informant qua crime in question.
8. It is submitted that only on 10.12.2024, complaint qua occurrence dated 26.10.2024 was lodged on the basis of which the present FIR was registered. It is submitted that the aforesaid delay of about one and half month is sufficient to
3/4 suggest that implication of petitioner was a result of an afterthought.
9. Arguing further, learned counsel submitted that photographs, which were collected during investigation, showing nothing objectionable, and it was simply a birthday wish to the daughter of the informant, which was displayed as 'Whatsapp status'.
10. It is submitted that photographs, which was collected during investigation are not of such nature which may forced the daughter of the informant to commit suicide without leaving no any other option. In this context, learned counsel relied upon the legal report of Hon'ble Supreme Court as available through Gurucharan Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2017) 1 SCC 433.
11. While concluding argument, it is submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent and, moreover, investigation of this case is already concluded, for which charge-sheet has been submitted and as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.
12. Learned A.P.P. for the State, while opposing the prayer for bail of the petitioner, could not disputed the aforesaid delay to lodge the FIR.
4/4
13. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by taking note of the fact as admittedly death of the daughter of the informant took place in her parental home, where probable cause of death not appears given in the complaint petition, coupled with fact photographs collected during investigation prima facie not suggesting such objectionable in nature, which forced the daughter of the informant to commit suicide, as discussed aforesaid, accordingly, petitioner above-named, who is a man of clean antecedent, is directed to be released on bail, furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M. - 1st Class, Court No. 5 (East), Muzaffarpur/concerned court, in connection with Rampur Hari P.S. Case No. 114 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C/Section 480(3) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (in short "B.N.S.S."). (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) Rajeev/- U T